On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 6:02 PM Tom Seewald <tseew...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I forgot to mention that bfq appears to be the only IO scheduler that 
> supports cgroups-v2 IO controllers [1]. Perhaps I am wrong, but I wasn't able 
> to find documentation indicating that mq-deadline is cgroup-aware, at the 
> very least it's not documented in the official deadline tunables section [2].

I'm not convinced it's the domain of an IO scheduler to be involved,
rather than it being explicit UX intended by the desktop environment.
Seems to me the desktop environment is in a better position to know
what users expect.

> I'm mentioning this because btrfs' support for cgroups-v2 (and the IO 
> isolation/fairness capability it provides) was listed as one of the key 
> reasons to move to btrfs. While I am not clear on exactly how the IO 
> scheduler and files system interact when it comes to IO cgroups, I thought it 
> was worth bringing up.

It is and it's very relevant. I think there are more questions than
answers, to what degree there may be unexpected conflicts. In this
particular case I'm not that concerned about the majority. I'm in fact
concerned about a distinct minority who could end up having a
significantly worse experience, and have no idea why, and then being
told it is they who should do more testing and provide bug reports to
prove it's the IO scheduler causing the problem.

Chris Murphy
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 

Reply via email to